Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
...
Here's some quotes

"Mike Manley makes some comments on CO2 pool with Tesla in Europe - says it's the lowest cost way of meeting the European CO2 rules in 2020/21, but doesn't replace FCA's plans to roll out hybrids/EVs."

"Total cost of credits across both Europe and Nafta is euro1.8bn, CFO Richard Palmer says"

"2020
20% conventional ICE tech rollout
80% credit pooling

2021
40% ICE tech
45% from EV/hybrid rollout
15% credits

2022
50-60% EV/hybrid
40% ICE tech

Manley: "if there is need for pooling [in '22], it will be v v small""
....

Also who is FCA kidding? Only needing 15% credits in 2021 and none in 2022 is not happening.

I remember those quotes and my response was the same as yours - Manley and Palmer are delusional.

And it doesn’t go away. After 2023 the limits get cranked down to another whole level of pain.
 
Last edited:
I doubt it. Tesla designs cars 4-5 years in the future. The China car will be radical, as was the CT. As far as we know, the Chinese design center doesn't even exist yet.

The cybertruck construction - a stainless steel stressed-skin - is very efficient for the purpose of a truck which must be durable and capable of hauling and towing. A city car has different needs - I would think that low weight and ability to have complex curves to provide low Cd would be worthwhile. A radical approach to that for an affordable (non-super) car is some sort of composite frame or even stressed skin (ie carbon fiber plastics). Like the cyber design it is the mass manufacturing process and the crash safety that would likely take the most design effort for such a car.
 
The Supercharger can't tell if it's powering the HVAC (unless there is some way for the car to tell it, but I haven't seen anything like that). It just knows how many kWh have been used.
Unless something I haven't seem has changed, it's the car that handles the supercharging transaction with the Tesla Mothership, not the charging cabinet.
 
China will not significantly cut new energy vehicle subsidies this year - China.org.cn

My apologies if this has already been discussed.

Any thoughts on tomorrow’s share price?
Positive Asia market and Future bodes well
upload_2020-1-12_18-37-30.png


upload_2020-1-12_18-37-53.png
 
I believe you are misunderstanding what Diess is saying. To be clear, Diess is talking about a 30% reduction in CO2 emissions of the German automobile fleet by 2030 (which might be achieved by an automobile fleet that is 30% electric), not 30% of yearly automobile production being EVs. Considering that cars have a life span of up to 20 years, achieving an automobile fleet that is 30% electric in 2030 would require moving to almost 100% EV production within the next few years. I suppose if regulators forced such a fast transition, while good for the planet, that would indeed be painful for VW.

Is that really what they are talking about? I know China has some pretty aggressive targets, and they are only targeting 20% of production to be EV by 2025, not total fleet numbers.

Then again, a number of EU countries are aiming for a total ban of non-EV sales by 2030, although Germany does not seem to be one of those. France is only targeting 2040 for this.

Reading the article, I think they're talking about 30% of production, are they not?
 
Well I'm relocating from the perpetually grey Midwest...to a coast. So my magic crystal ball is packed away.

However in me bones I feel there is only one direction for this stock...and that is North of 五百

I agree. I think Monday will set the tone for the week. Whether the stairs or the escalator, the direction is up.

Hope your move goes smoothly...Oh and please unpack your crystal ball soon :)
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Artful Dodger
This "painful transition" has been clearly articulated by the EU for the last eight years. If VW had spent their effort on developing zero-emission vehicles instead of criminally fraudulent diesels it would have been a lot less painful.

The thing is that Volkswagen has supposedly been 'all in' on EVs since 2016 (after the emissions scandal), so if even the most serious traditional car manufacturer is making statements like this, that is a really dooming sign for the entire industry. Most are still not as serious about EVs as Volkswagen was in 2016.

I wrote about the traditional auto industry a few months ago. I think if nothing comes out in the next two years that compares decently enough to Teslas to sell at least 100k units a year, I don't think any car manufacturer will survive the next decade without bailouts/large mergers/bankruptcies. I was thinking the ID.3 would pull this off, but at this point it's not looking too great.
 
Last edited:
This "painful transition" has been clearly articulated by the EU for the last eight years. If VW had spent their effort on developing zero-emission vehicles instead of criminally fraudulent diesels it would have been a lot less painful.

But it's a lot less difficult to just apply some minor tweaks to the current engine software than it is to develop an entirely unrelated technology and make it work properly. That would just be a lot of unnecessary hard work considering that the clean diesel we have right now works just fine except it doesn't meet the desired emissions standards without some minor tweaking....

BTW, we spent our own money to purchase one of those cars made in California by that little pipsqueak upstart company. Then we took it apart to see if it's worth putting into production over here using our superior automobile know-how but when we transferred the tech to our cars, well, it didn't perform as well as expected so we determined battery-electric cars aren't really ready for prime time yet. We'll make a few of the electric abominations to keep the eco-conscious tree-huggers happy but it's just not a viable technology yet.

And it's a real shame all the trees they want to cut down over there in Brandenburg. It makes me think that California company doesn't love the trees as much as we do (our cars fertilize the air with CO2 for healthy trees).

/s
 
And then they stop seeing $TSLAQ tweets.

I don't have my own Twitter Account but if I did, this service of Paul's is something I would be interested in. Would I have to pay monthly? It sounds like a very promising business model. He has a HUGE potential customer base (pretty much every rational person who doesn't want TSLAQ$ BS in their face).

Smart businessman! ;)

Seriously though, my wife let me sign into her Twitter account so I could make a light-hearted reply to one of toilet boy's tweets and my wife was amazed that within 3 minutes she was on the block list! :rolleyes:

Or maybe she's just on toilet boy's personal block list. I haven't cared enough to waste the minute to find out which it is. :cool:
 
Last edited:
Yeah I think a million is wildly optimistic but we know Elon is usually delivers his optimistic targets eventually. However I'll be more than happy if they can ramp up to 500k out of there in the next 2 years. Exciting times ahead.
Moderator Sorta-Kinda ON:

Well! We get a new member to get the tip for the Numerology Double Hat Trick! Well done, @Davmal.

(Good thing this absolutely OT occurred during a weekend).....

look at the post's number....
 
We don't know what products make sense for Full-Cyber, Partial-Cyber or Classic (conventional) design.

Fair bet Model S/X, Model 3/Y, Roadster, and perhaps a Gen4 car will remain conventional.

We don't know if Tesla is making if Gen4 car, or if it will be painted.

My best guess is they will make one, and it may or may not be painted, but will be conventional, or Partial-Cyber...

I agree with Karen, Partial-Cyber has lot of interesting design possibilities.

A mix of Full-Cyber, Partial-Cyber and Classic give Tesla a range of products with sufficient variety, while retaining their classic design language. Variety also gives customers more choice, and people want different things..

For Robo-taxis I don't think customers particularly care what the car looks like from the outside, they will not spend much time looking at the outside... Non-painted and hard-wearing exterior makes a lot of sense for Robo-taxis...

agreed
 
I know the feeling. Doesn't matter that they're a plantation, or that an actual forest will get planted in their place; I sympathize with the trees. :(

(Though I don't find Tesla's buildings ugly. Well, Fremont is ugly, but...)

But, it is what it is. This is the place in the Berlin area that's been allocated for large-scale industrial development, where they've been trying to get a factory for years. I'm sure that Tesla didn't go into this saying, "Hey, what we'd really like to do with this new factory is knock down a bunch of trees...."

What I am concerned is, initially on a well publicized event some thousand trees get planted and they publish a schedule, and everyone gets a back slap for a job well done, but then 10 years from now no one remembers, follows through or cares. Tesla says they have done their job paying some local green-group for planting it, and their job is done. That group then may point fingers at the local authorities for not providing enough support .. yada yada.. the news fades into oblivion, the world is poorer by a few hundred thousand trees for the next generation. Everyone forgets and moves on..

Which agency is going to follow through till completion - till the trees reach a mature stage? What is Tesla's penalty if they fail to get this done?

It is easy saying, we will plant three times. Following it up till completion like any other project is hard.
 
Is that really what they are talking about? I know China has some pretty aggressive targets, and they are only targeting 20% of production to be EV by 2025, not total fleet numbers.

Then again, a number of EU countries are aiming for a total ban of non-EV sales by 2030, although Germany does not seem to be one of those. France is only targeting 2040 for this.

Reading the article, I think they're talking about 30% of production, are they not?

From the article:

"According to Diess’ reckoning, one-third of the vehicle fleet on the road by 2030 would have to be all-electric in order to achieve a 30 percent reduction in fleet CO2 emissions by the same year."

But you're right, while some people may be proposing ambitious targets, I don't see this happening in Germany. Auto lobby too powerful. :(
 
Last edited: